Literature DB >> 30694961

Cluster Set Loading in the Back Squat: Kinetic and Kinematic Implications.

Alexander B Wetmore1, John P Wagle1, Matt L Sams2, Christopher B Taber3, Brad H DeWeese1, Kimitake Sato1, Michael H Stone1.   

Abstract

Wetmore, A, Wagle, JP, Sams, ML, Taber, CB, DeWeese, BH, Sato, K, and Stone, MH. Cluster set loading in the back squat: Kinetic and kinematic implications. J Strength Cond Res 33(7S): S19-S25, 2019-As athletes become well trained, they require greater stimuli and variation to force adaptation. One means of adding additional variation is the use of cluster loading. Cluster loading involves introducing interrepetition rest during a set, which in theory may allow athletes to train at higher absolute intensities for the same volume. The purpose of this study was to investigate the kinetic and kinematic implications of cluster loading as a resistance training programming tactic compared with traditional loading (TL). Eleven resistance-trained men (age = 26.75 ± 3.98 years, height = 181.36 ± 5.96 cm, body mass = 89.83 ± 10.66 kg, and relative squat strength = 1.84 ± 0.34) were recruited for this study. Each subject completed 2 testing sessions consisting of 3 sets of 5 back squats at 80% of their 1 repetition maximum with 3 minutes of interset rest. Cluster loading included 30 seconds of interrepetition rest with 3 minutes of interset rest. All testing was performed on dual-force plates sampling at 1,000 Hz, and the barbell was connected to 4 linear position transducers sampling at 1,000 Hz. Both conditions had similar values for peak force, concentric average force, and eccentric average force (p = 0.25, effect size (ES) = 0.09, p = 0.25, ES = 0.09, and p = 0.60, ES = 0.04, respectively). Cluster loading had significantly higher peak power (PP) (p < 0.001, ES = 0.77), peak and average velocities (p < 0.001, ES = 0.77, and p < 0.001, ES = 0.81, respectively), lower times to PP and velocity (p < 0.001, ES = -0.68, and p < 0.001, ES = -0.68, respectively) as well as greater maintenance of time to PP (p < 0.001, ES = 1.57). These results suggest that cluster loading may be superior to TL when maintaining power output and time point variables is the desired outcome of training.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 30694961     DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002972

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Strength Cond Res        ISSN: 1064-8011            Impact factor:   3.775


  3 in total

1.  Acute Effects of Cluster and Rest Redistribution Set Structures on Mechanical, Metabolic, and Perceptual Fatigue During and After Resistance Training: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ivan Jukic; Amador García Ramos; Eric R Helms; Michael R McGuigan; James J Tufano
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 11.136

2.  The "Journal of Functional Morphology and Kinesiology" Journal Club Series: Resistance Training.

Authors:  Antonio Paoli; Tatiana Moro; Silvio Lorenzetti; Jan Seiler; Fabian Lüthy; Micah Gross; Federico Roggio; Helmi Chaabene; Giuseppe Musumeci
Journal:  J Funct Morphol Kinesiol       Date:  2020-04-02

3.  Acute mechanical, physiological and perceptual responses in older men to traditional-set or different cluster-set configuration resistance training protocols.

Authors:  Antonio Dello Iacono; Domenico Martone; Lawrence Hayes
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2020-08-10       Impact factor: 3.078

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.